November 2005 Print

FATIMA Pilgrimage of Reparation

 

Your Excellency, what is the importance of the message of Fatima for the Church and world in 2005?

Well, 2005 is not a special time in and of itself. However, we may say that Fatima is present today as it was in 1917. By this I mean that nothing has been lost, nothing belongs to the past of the message of Fatima. We are still absolutely within the time-frame of Fatima. The message is the same and the consequences are the same. Essentially, this means that the world continues to go the way of sin, yet there has been this serious, twofold warning from heaven. I say twofold, because there is a warning of temporal significance, i.e., what will happen on earth and it is a great threat of terrible plagues upon the earth, amongst them war. Remember, Fatima occurred in the midst of World War I. Further, there was the warning of a second war if the world did not convert. This is one side of the warning,  but more dramatically, there was a warning of eternal consequences, namely the question of what would happen to the souls of those who did not convert. This was the occasion for the dramatic vision of hell, and not merely hell, but the crowds of numerous people falling into hell. So there were two warnings there about sin and its consequences. There is also, however, a twofold invitation: firstly, to immediate penance and prayer; and secondly, the great hope that God, in His mercy, despite the behavior of the world, is again taking the first step and offering a relatively easy way to salvation: His Mother and her Immaculate Heart.

Isn't it true that Our Lady asked for something very simple, namely that Russia be consecrated to her Immaculate Heart? Today, Rome believes that has been done. What are your comments?

Rome pretends that it has been accomplished and they base this claim on words from Sr. Lucia herself. I read an interview she gave to a Cardinal where she claims that around 1985 there was to be an atomic war, which was stopped by the first consecration performed by Pope John Paul II of the world to Our Lady. This consecration was something, but one could say it was "halfway," for it is not what Our Lady requested, namely the consecration of Russia by the Holy Father and the bishops of the entire world. But even though most participated, not all the bishops of the world participated in this consecration anyway. I have been told, as well, that here in Fatima, the bishop of Fatima in 2000 announced that the consecration of Russia would be done by the Pope on October 8th of that year. Further, he told the faithful at the basilica that the Holy Father had requested that the statue of Fatima be brought to Rome for that occasion. Now, the occasion was the Jubilee of the bishops, which means that many of the bishops of the world would have been present in Rome at the time. This makes us suspect that if there were such actions on the part of the Holy Father, it means he was not so sure himself that Russia had indeed been consecrated. Also, we can be sure it was not something the bishop mentioned accidentally since he did so three times. He spoke expressly of the consecration of Russia. And, in fact, on October 8th, nothing of the sort happened; it was just an Act of Entrustment to Our Lady for the world.

Do you think the restoration of the Church that Catholics are waiting and praying for is intimately tied up with the consecration of Russia?

This is a difficult question. We must distinguish between the two aspects of the question: the temporal side which affects peace in the world, and then the war of souls. If you speak of peace in the world, you do not necessarily look immediately at the Church but at the State. The peace that is promised with the consecration of Russia is a peace on earth, at least somewhere, so to speak. This is because the act of a supernatural consecration of Russia implies that it should also mean peace for the Church. Somewhere we make the link between both, for the spreading of errors from Russia is not only demolishing the State, but also the Church. I may say that such an understanding is perfectly feasible, and I would even go so far as to say that to understand Fatima, we must understand it in this fashion.

Your Excellency, we know that Russia has not yet been converted. What is the situation in Russia today?

Well, there is definitely more freedom for the Orthodox now than there was before 1989, so in this sense, the Orthodox are more free to move. But this is the Orthodox. It has nothing to do with the conversion of Russia or the return of the Orthodox to the Catholic Church. The schismatic Orthodox are adamant to continue their way apart from Rome, in fact. I do not think that there is much deep change in Russia. Though they lurk behind the scenes, the Communists are no longer "on top." It is now more liberal, with capitalism and the mafia, if you want. So the Church goes its way, but the Church and State are very closely linked there. I do not see any indications of the Orthodox coming back to the Catholic Church.

What happened in Fatima in 2004 to trigger this Pilgrimage of Reparation on the part of the Society? Obviously there are many scandalous things going on in the Church, but why would the event of the Hindus practicing their ritual in the Capelhina be singled out?

Granted, right now in the whole world, there are a lot of scandals which are the product of ecumenism, either directly or else they are at least the product of inter-religious behavior which is simply indifferentism. Such scandals do exist everywhere. What moved us about the events which happened in the Capelhina to do something now was that it was simply "the last drop," the drop that was too much. For these ecumenists to dare allow that to happen in Fatima is too much. This is the very place where Heaven made the effort to come and speak to the world and ask men to pay attention to God, to remind men that there is one God, that these questions are serious, and that although He is our Creator, He will also be our Judge. Here in Fatima, you have a sort of summary of Catholic doctrine and life. It was precisely here at the heart where this attack happened. It was not the Hindus' actions themselves that was the real problem, rather it was the fact that it happened here with permission. Probably, those who allowed it were not even aware of the gravity of what they did, but the very fact that it was even possible to happen shows how far we've gone. It is like the tip of the iceberg which was a good occasion for us to ring an alarm precisely because of this shocking violation of the First Commandment, a true sacrilege. There are many similar things happening today, it is true, but this one precisely, hurting the Heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary, was something we could not let pass. The honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary was at stake.

Your Excellency, the conciliar Church does not really see the gravity of the situation. It marches under the banner of ecumenism and while we protest, it thinks it is performing a work of charity. It considers us intransigent and self-centered. What is the proper perspective on this issue?

Charity starts with truth. It is very simple, really. Let's say a man who is planning to board a train asks you whether the train goes to New York. You know that it goes to Chicago. If you tell him it does go to New York, you are lying. Now, if someone challenged you and asked you why you told him that, would it make sense to reply, "Well, it was charity, and I didn't want to hurt him. He seemed to like that train so much." That is not charity; it is exactly the contrary! And it is the same with all these false religions which pretend to lead people to heaven when in fact they lead them to hell. To tell people it is all right to take a false road is a lie and the exact opposite of charity. Saying the truth in such situations may cause trouble, but it is still the truth. In fact, friction is often one of the effects of truth when you have to deal with someone who is in error.

Why is it that we are not allowed to enter into this ecumenical dialogue? It seems there is room for everyone but us.

Precisely. Consider what happened even during this pilgrimage. The Hindus were given open doors, allowed to go even to the altar. To us, however, the barrier was closed and they refused us entrance. We had to remove that, and we did, but on their side it was a clear expression that ecumenism is not for us. In some aspects it is logical, and in some aspects it is not. If they can allow Hindus to come in, how can they pretend that there is no room for us? But remember there was already a time when there was no room for Someone.

It seems to us that there is a lot of piety and devotion in places like Fatima and Lourdes. Do traditionalists see a contradiction here?

We obviously see no problem in the devotion of the people. We do have a problem, however, with the way in which this devotion is misled. The hearts of Catholics simply expect to receive the right food, which is the food of the Faith, the truth, and grace. If they come here, it is to honor the Blessed Virgin Mary. The problem is not on their side; the problem is in the leaders who lead them the wrong way.

Many faithful came to Fatima for the Pilgrimage of Reparation. Can you expound on how exactly we did make reparation this weekend?

We did many things for reparation. Primarily, we celebrated Mass for reparation. We had night vigils of prayer in front of the Blessed Sacrament. We followed the Way of the Cross, and we had a procession to the Capelhina, saying the Rosary explicitly for reparation. The whole pilgrimage truly was carried out in a spirit of reparation.

We were not allowed through the gates and an attempt was made to drown us out by turning up the speakers. What are your thoughts?

Well, it started with the vacuum cleaners, then the Sisters, and then the loudspeakers. They definitely do not like us and it was entirely a provocation on their part. We had met with the authorities before, everything was prepared, they knew we were coming, and they knew we were taking an "empty time" where nothing else was scheduled so that we would not disturb their program. The entire episode was pure provocation on their part.

So they knew we were coming?

Absolutely. We were fair. We went to see them and told them what we were going to do and when.

It seems as if the whole word accepts this universal toleration of beliefs. It's only the "extremists" who challenge this principle who are considered "nasty." The little Society of Saint Pius X seems to often stand alone in denouncing this craziness.

Well, the Muslims are treated better than us. We are treated not much better than the devil, whom they don't believe in anymore anyway.

We weren't welcome in Fatima and that was clear by where we had to say the Mass and where we had to gather, in a field rather distant from the shrine. Why this location?

Part of it was practicality. It was one thing which we could rent with some relative ease. Last time, pressure was put on owners of other grounds so that we would not be able to use them.

The Society recently issued a dossier entitled From Ecumenism to Silent Apostasy which was sent to the Holy Father and all the Cardinals. Now we have this Pilgrimage of Reparation. Do we expect any response from Rome? Also, are we trying to send a message to Rome and try to wake up Rome by this pilgrimage?

No, not directly. The first intention really is reparation, which is already enough. For a long time, we have realized that we do better to deal with heaven than with men. I can say, with my eyes closed, that the results shall be more effective when we deal with God rather than His saints.

The Holy Father is in Cologne at World Youth Day while we are in Fatima. Do you think he is aware of our presence here?

Maybe. I cannot presume that.

Who is funding the ecumenical basilica they are building here in Fatima? What is this costing and where is the money coming from?

First of all, the money is coming from here. Such a place of pilgrimage receives a lot of money. There are still many generous Catholics who will give great amounts of money for the Blessed Virgin Mary, that she may be honored. It is not such a problem to get the money for this building. The cost is 50 million euros [almost $60 million in U.S. dollars–Ed.], which is a rather large amount. I have been told that perhaps there has been a contribution from the United Nations, but this claim has not been verified yet.

Now that the Fatima pilgrimage is over, do you think we succeeded in what we set out to do?

I think so, on several levels. First, things went well, despite the disturbance at the Capelhina. Speaking generally, things went very well. Everything was wonderful and beautiful. There was great devotion and it was a real pleasure to see all the faithful devout and modestly dressed. Everything is coherently correct in front of God and we see all these signs of Catholic life and the Faith in all aspects. So I am sure that a lot of true reparation went to heaven in these days, which was the purpose. Beyond that, it was a respectable show of strength for the faithful with all the priests and seminarians encouraging everyone to persevere, which is a very great reason to thank God for everything.

Finally, Your Excellency, where do we go from here?

We merely continue. Yesterday, I read that the President of the Bishops' Conference in France, who is also a member of the Ecclesia Dei Commission and is thus well-placed to say such things, said it was very clear that we have to respect and be kind to all traditionally-minded people...provided they accept the Council and the New Mass. So nothing has changed. We must simply continue.